HL Deb 30 January 1945 vol 134 cc787-801

3.45 P.m.

LORD PORTSEA rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether they are in a position to make any statement as to the Norman Islands and their responsibilities as to the feeding of the people and generally as to other matters concerning the islands; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, there have been considerable changes, a wider horizon and a brighter prospect, perhaps, for the Norman Islands since I last addressed your Lordships. At last we have evidence—and evidence accepted by the Government; that is the important point—brought to us by desperate young men and women who have escaped from the Norman Islands to tell us of the conditions of the people there and especially (and this should touch us most) the condition of the children. We are also said to have the opinion of two gentlemen, neutral subjects, who recently went to the islands and were allowed to visit certain places—presumably certain selected places—and to see some of the people. We are a very honest people—there is no doubt about that—and in this case extremely gullible. It requires all one's gullibility to believe that the islanders, after four years of German rule, with all their knowledge of spies and spying, would confide to two foreigners, two strangers, however well introduced, and open their hearts to them and give them their real opinions and their ideas, and expect to remain in the islands alive. The islander is not easily led, and he is very difficult to drive.

A very prominent statesman said recently that he sometimes wondered whether the war had lasted for a flash or for an age. There can be no doubt as to the duration of the war and the agony of it as it has affected our people in the Norman Islands. They, a free people, a never-conquered people, are now slaves, and slaves by the act of the Government. At least, that is my view. I trust that the Government will not think me too bitter; but if ever a man has a right to be bitter I have that right when I think of the people of these islands. They are starving and, so far as I can make out, very little sympathy is shown them by the Government. In fact, to me the Government's whole attitude in this matter reminds me of a saying of Artemus Ward, whose writings are no doubt familiar to many of your Lordships. Before the burning point of slavery came into the War of Secession, Mr. Ward was asked, "Sir, does not your blood boil when you think of three-and-a-half millions of your fellow citizens clanking their chains in the south?" "Not a bile," said Mr. Ward. "Not a bile. Let 'em clank." That was the Government's view—"Let 'em clank." The Government's view was that the islands could not starve. Did not King Nebuchadnezzar live for a considerable period on grass? Is not the grass in the Norman Islands particularly nutritious and healthy? In this country we can eat as much as we can pay for. "Let 'em clank!"

All this, of course, is old—"as old as Cain, old as the Ten Commandments; as new as yesterday." The evidence is there—the echo of the cries of the children, little children dying slowly in their homes. The echo reaches the Government ear, and it is not music to the Government or to the Government's conscience—for even Governments have consciences. One man has heard and recognized that sound, and he is big enough to admit the original mistake and to wish to correct it. "All great men," said the present Prime Minister's father, "make mistakes," but not all of them, my Lords, are big enough to admit it and to seek to remedy their mistakes. It takes an exceptional man to do that. I have no doubt that many of your Lordships have seen in the course of your experience that it does take a big man to admit that he can possibly have made a mistake.

Government sins of omission and commission, action and inaction, have caused the Norman Islands much misery and the lives of many. They have caused slavery and martyrdom. And what has been the cost to this country? Much, and it will cost much in the future. And during that awful period of five years no single word or gesture, of sympathy, of love, of praise, or indeed a single word of any kind, nor a holding out of the hand—nothing from the proper quarter to these poor people, people of our own blood. Their offered money accepted, their sons fighting, they themselves left unarmed and defenceless, the Flag hauled down by Government order by English hands, and all left in the lurch, for the first corner to enslave. Not a word though begged for in this House again and again. Even Hitler sends messages to his garrisons and his people; he sends word when the situation is desperate and he bids his people fight on to the last. Even that message is better than neglect. It is the human touch, and it is a thousand times better than nothing; it shows concern, faith, confidence. We are fighting for the same ideals, the same country, the same Crown and the same faith. Can you estimate the weight or the value of such a word as I am speaking of to our people in captivity and for those 97 young islanders who fought at Dunkirk and were forgotten by the Government in Jersey, to visit which they had been given leave? Now for four years they have been in German concentration camps, and not a single word of any sort or kind has reached them. Poor soldiers, poor people dying on their feet, starved of food, sympathy and human charity, starved body and soul, forgotten, while we here can eat as much as we can pay for, and we boast of our Christmas turkey.

Such things are burnt into one—unforgettable unforgettable even by a dog, the most forgiving of all God's creatures. And the Norman is not a dog, as your Lordships are fully aware in your own persons. But at last, at long last—and that is why I speak of a brighter prospect—the Government decided to ask Germany to permit the Red Cross to send food in parcels into the islands, and food is being sent by that wonderful organization. And what is the food sent? One ship, a small ship, the "Vega," has been selected to carry provisions on a bimonthly service from Lisbon. One ship and one only—no provision in case she should be damaged or sunk, or detained from any other cause; and she was so detained. So they received her cargo of 750 tons—not 7,500 but 750 tons—of food and medicines for 70,000 people for thirty days. Less than thirteen ounces per head per day. But let us be cheerful—I am trying to be cheerful. The "clank" is going out of the chains. Thirteen ounces a day for rejoicing, and the assurance, I trust and believe, of the Government of a regular service till the night is past and the day dawns. I think we have been assured that more and better provision will follow regularly, perhaps in better ships. It would be very good to learn from my noble friend that at least two ships have been found, ships of fair size. As it is, affairs are not very much in advance of my offer of three years ago of a small trawler and a few tons of food. America is loaning fifty ships to France. Can we not ask for one or two? Is not blood thicker than water, as was said at the Peiho Forts and later at Manila when the bread cast upon the waters was found after many days?

Those who have escaped from Jersey and Guernsey say that the position is desperate. No rationing, because there is nothing to ration, no fuel, "no heat when Tiber freezes," and the cold! Although we have coal and oil and wood and electricity and gas here, we know what the cold is. No bread, only the husks that were not thought very much of by the prodigal son; no wood, for the Germans will not allow the trees to be cut for fear of exposing the gun emplacements. Do we not remember the story of the siege of Derry? Are there not many of us who have read the story of Josephus? Do we realize the crime that we are now committing? Are we blind? We must have clean hands before we go into court to try Pétain. Is it that the Government are "too proud" to ask to be permitted to send more food? With a fortnightly ship it means 26 ounces of food per day per head of the population. If we cannot ask that, then let us ask the Americans to help us in the glorious work of saving the innocent. Let New Jersey redeem the balance for Jersey, her god-parent. And let us bind ourselves to her in a common bond for her benefit as well as for ours, for blood is thicker than water. This is a matter of holding on to what is called civilization and freedom—all the freedoms and the hopes of the world.

And this is perhaps a too serious suggestion to make, but I would make it: let wide statesmanship examine the Caribbean plan and its "bargains," the common insurance plan, the islands' interest in the Empire. In this is the germ of a binding and a permanent coming together of interest, of co-operation and maintenance, of friendship, a guarantee of safety and security based on common interests and protection, progress and faith, for the future of the islands is of paramount importance to all loyalists. Their future treatment must stand for ever, where good faith and honour abide. We had ports, our ports in Ireland. The Crown once held Tangier and the Ionian Islands. We refused Delagoa Bay at a price of £60,000. A Government spokesman in this House told the House that he did not know where the Norman Islands were! The worth of those ports to us during the South African war, for instance, or now—can any estimate be placed upon it? The President of the United States the other day said: "the Hawaiian Islands used to be considered an outpost; to-day they constitute a major base." "He that bath ears to hear let him hear." It is only the impossible that happens. I, even I, can remember a strong agitation to "cut the painter" between ourselves and the great Dominions—Colonies as they were then. Had those Dominions treated their Mother Country as this country has treated her island home, where should we be?—as the facetious Hans Breitman said, "Gone mit der lager beer. Gone in der evig keit," and we would have deserved it. So much for human wisdom, prescience, statesmanship, as opposed to the dictates of honour, patriotism and loyalty.

At the present moment the islands are very strongly fortified and held. The German, whom we sometimes look upon as a kind of military fool, thought he knew their value, and has spent enormous sums in fortifying them. Guernsey is well nigh impregnable and Guernsey closes the entrance and the exit to the Channel. The "Gneisenau," poor "Gneisenau," in Brest, bombed day after day with of course the small bombs we had in those days, came with her consorts up Channel and inside Guernsey waters, and startled Dover. In 1940 the Government decided that the islands could not defend themselves, though for years that defence had been settled and agreed upon and paid for. The islanders had defended themselves all through history, and it is no use telling us now, "Oh, but you forget the bombs, my boy." The man is the article required, whether he be in the field or on the office stool. And this excuse was made for taking away all the arms and hauling down the flag and leaving the people in the lurch. I say Pétain had a higher ideal. His conduct was hardly less worthy. He delayed when he found that the French would not fight; this Government left her charge twenty-four hours before the enemy came, having accepted the islands' money and at least one division of fighting men. My Lords, some do not like the words "abandonment" and "betrayal." I am not seeking to find words, but I say it was a case of matricide.

From the islanders' point of view it must not be overlooked—and this, if I may say so, is the important point—that the German at the time of our flight, that is to say, just before the Battle of Britain, was convinced that England herself would drop into his lap in a few days. Military fool as we think him, he did not need to risk a single man, not a Pomeranian grenadier, not a ship, not a 'plane, in an attack on the islands. They were his. He had only to wait a few more days, and when he had conquered England they were his—a ripe plum. Again, Guernsey is 35 square miles in extent—not the size of many a deer forest. No large force could have been used in that confined area; her size protected her. If the islands could not have been held by the islanders for a few weeks, those men at least could have died, and died decently, instead of being slaves. And how could they die better? If anybody knows I trust he will tell me. "With your shield or on it," said the Spartan mother. In their deep lanes and caves—I myself know one cave which is over one hundred yards long. No sacred places! No Athens! No Benedictine monastery! No Rome! Let 'em bomb the open fields. They would have done very little harm. But they were too wise; they would not have wasted their bombs when they thought they were going to have England in their lap. "Impossible to defend," said the Government. "Impossible to defend; the odds are too great."

Fancy a British Government, an English Government, saying the odds were too great, a thousand to one, people would be killed! We have heard of Agincourt, we have heard of Poictiers, and we know the recent Mediterranean story—I am sure it is known to your Lordships—of our three cruisers, with 6-in. guns, who knew that a battle fleet was coming out to meet them, and yet steamed straight ahead. A whole fleet of battleships, cruisers and T.B.D's—incalculable odds. One salvo and the cruisers would sink, and not a postage stamp would be left. But we had a man in command. He did not consider odds; he considered his country. He was not a pusillanimous "Harumfrodite." No, he was a man fit to stand at Nelson's right hand. Well, you know the result. When those battleships appeared he tried to pepper them with his small guns, and they turned and scattered. Is there one of you who would not have chosen the command of those three cruisers and the glory—"noble names devoted nobly, high ancestral deeds to share"—rather than the command of the battle fleet that scattered? Still, you cannot measure the odds.

Now the Red Cross, acting with the Government's sanction, and the Government having asked the Germans' permission, have sent this small duty ship which some "sob-stuffers" call a mercy ship—a mercy ship ! —carrying some 750 tons of medicine and food. This leviathan was intended to run a bimonthly service from Lisbon, a service that would have meant 26 ozs. of food per head per day if good fortune went with her and if time, tide and sea permitted. It was of course a neutral ship and a neutral crew, one ship only to run from Lisbon, but no sister ship, no alternative service, no substitute. There might have been air transport, but the Government would not, or did not, think fit to ask for that. After some trouble, and there was trouble, this ship unloaded her 750 tons in the island and the inspector who landed sent in a report to the Government. The Americans now are offering fifty ships to France. I ask for food and fuel for those of our own blood. I ask that first. Let us ask for two ships to carry through the services—two neutral ships with neutral crews. Have we no ports left? I ask for fuel, too, for even food must be cooked.

The story I have tried to tell your Lordships is written in blood. It is in the heart of every islander, of every man who knows the facts. It is ineffaceable. It will remain generation after generation; it will take the place of anno domini as a basic date; it will be the year of the matricide with the child offering her parent to the wolves. It is the lowest level, the very nadir ever reached by a British Government. But it is not too late even now to succour, or to try to succour, if it only be with a word of comfort, of praise and sincerity, something generous. Send food and fuel and clothing. Devise some plan now. The facts are no longer denied. Let there be some plan to relieve, as soon as possible, this great injustice, this great wrong. Do not pour out your foods on aliens who bite, or will bite your hands. Do something to save honour and duty. Look the foe in the face, meet him and beat him at the gates. Will not the Government give us some inkling of a policy? I beg to move.

4.14 p.m.

THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER

My Lords, the noble Lord has on several occasions asked questions of His Majesty's Government in regard to the plight of the Channel Islanders, as I shall still take leave to call them, and he has done so with intense sincerity of feeling, but on most of those occasions he has found himself without any other speaker to support him. That has not been, I am sure, from any lack of sympathy among your Lordships with the Channel Islanders, certainly not from any lack of sympathy in my own heart seeing they are in my diocese. Nor has it been from any lack of admiration for the passionate devotion which the noble Lord has to the cause for which he pleads. At the same time I think it ought to be said in this place that the noble Lord is not the only member of your Lordships' House who does feel real sympathy with tilt Channel Islanders in their plight.

Many of us feel that the noble Lord in his pleading really does misrepresent the position, that he minimizes the difficulties which have confronted His Majesty's Government and that he certainly minimizes what they have most certainly achieved. When he first put down his Motion some six weeks ago I had looked forward to the pleasure of supporting him in pressing His Majesty's Government as to whether they really were using every means to persuade the German Government to consent to the sending of a relief ship. I think in deference to representations made to the noble Lord he postponed his Motion and meanwhile, post hoc perhaps rather than propter hoc, the Government happily acted. The noble Lord has been singularly lukewarm I think in expressing gratitude to the Government for what they have done and I am glad to take this opportunity on behalf, I am sure, of vast numbers of people in this country and certainly of many Channel Islanders in this country and their relatives and friends with whom I personally am in touch, of congratulating the Government on their action in securing the dispatch of the "Vega" to Jersey and Guernsey. No doubt the amount of help which that ship was able to bring, especially on the first voyage, was small, but it must have meant a very great deal to the islanders in the form of assuring them that they were remembered by the people of this country. I know a good deal about the measure of the relief which it has brought to the minds and the feelings and anxieties of their friends and relatives here.

I am sure your Lordships will wish somebody not only to express this appreciation to the Government of what they have done in this matter, but also very warmly to thank the International Red Cross and the gallant seamen who handled the boat on that rather adventurous voyage. But beyond that I am happy to be able to support the noble Lord in expressing the hope that the noble Earl who replies for the Government on this occasion will be able to assure the House, and through this House the country, that everything possible will be done, not only to continue the relief which has been sent to the islands but to enlarge its scale. It may be that he will be able also to tell us whether he is assured that some part of the relief already sent has actually reached the civilians in the islands, how the cost has been defrayed and how the cost of the relief which I hope will still be sent, will be met. I think it is in the public interest that something should be said about the cost and who is to pay it. Admittedly the islanders are comparatively few in number, their privations are becoming very real, and yet I know that they are not so terrible as the privations of millions on the Continent of Europe. On the other hand, we all in this House recognize that though the Channel Islanders are few in number they are very near to us, they are our own kith and kin and we have it on high authority that even to the few our obligations can be great.

4.20 p.m.

LORD AMMON

My Lords, I do not propose to keep your Lordships for more than a few minutes lout I want it to be made clear, as the right reverend Prelate has suggested, that there is no lack of sympathy in this House for the islanders. Some years ago I raised the matter in another place again and again. I can understand the emotion of the noble Lord who raised the matter this afternoon, having regard to his connexion with the islands. However, I rise just to ask a question because I received a letter this morning from the Channel Islands in which the writer, after expressing appreciation of the amount of relief that has got to the islands, goes on to say that while there is great privation the islanders are suffering most from lack of fuel. He asked me to inquire if it is possible for the Government to make any statement as to whether they have any real policy with regard to the position of the islands. I think there may have been a good deal of exaggeration about conditions in the islands, but I do not think there is much exaggeration so far as lack of fuel is concerned, though there may have been as regards the food supply. We must all have some sense of responsibility, for I suppose hardly one of us can look back without a certain feeling of humiliation because probably for the first time for a thousand years British territory was evacuated without any struggle. That I think we shall never quite live down. What we can do is to make what recompense possible, and I would like the representative of His Majesty's Government not only to tell us what has been done—some of us know it is a little more than we have been given credit for—but whether they have any policy.

4.22 p.m.

LORD RENNELL

My Lords, I quite agree with what the noble Lord, Lord Ammon, has just said so far as the future is concerned. We would be all much relieved if we could have an assurance about the rehabilitation of the islands and the restoration of the life of the people there. It would not be enough just to give them whatever allowances other people are given for damage suffered. There must be a general rehabilitation scheme, especially in the case of Alderney which was entirely evacuated. That is the least that can be done for these people after all they have been through.

4.23 p.m.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

My Lords, the noble Lord who placed this Motion on the Paper this afternoon spoke with some warmth and I shall be forgiven I hope if I do not follow the many ramifications he pursued in explaining his question to your Lordships. But I would say at once that it is wrong—entirely wrong—to say that the people in the Channel Islands have not the sympathy of His Majesty's Government. In point of fact His Majesty's Government hold the deepest sympathy for these people in the troubles and trials which have come upon them through no fault of their own. If I wished to be controversial with the noble Lord, I could remind him that he was a member of another place for some considerable time and perhaps on his shoulders rests a considerable degree of responsibility for the failure lo build up armaments in this country in time to go to war. My noble friend should know by now, because he has been told before, that the responsibility for sustaining and nourishing the civil population of all occupied countries rests entirely upon the Occupying Power and His Majesty's Government, as has been repeatedly stated, are doing everything they can to supplement the basic rations of the civil population in the Channel Islands.

Since the date when my noble friend last placed a question on the Order Paper we have received preliminary reports from the representatives of the International Red Cross who visited the Channel Islands on the first voyage of the "Vega." The reports which they have sent us indicate that the unloading and disposal of the supplies proceeded satisfactorily. Those for Guernsey and Sark were unloaded on December 29 and those for Jersey on January 2. I take it that those supplies are now in the hands of the civil population. The "Vega" returned to Lisbon on January 9 but unfortunately she was damaged in harbour in Guernsey and repairs have become necessary. It was not possible for her to sail again on the date originally intended, but I have been informed that she is to sail on her second trip to the Channel Islands on February 1. I have heard no suggestion except from the noble Lord that one ship is inadequate for the task, but if the Red Cross organization represent to His Majesty's Government that another ship is required he can take it from me that every possible effort will be made to find another ship with a neutral crew to take supplies to the Channel Islanders. When this ship sails again she will carry as many as possible of the articles which were recommended by the Red Cross representative. The stores she will carry will include soap and salt, medical supplies and drugs and more food parcels, and will do a great deal to alleviate the position. The question of evacuating seriously ill persons who cannot receive proper medical attention in the islands was discussed by the Red Cross representatives and the matter is now being actively pursued by the Government.

In reply to the noble Lord, Lord Ammon, I can say that the question of coal is also receiving urgent consideration and I hope I shall be in a position to make a statement shortly. There is undoubtedly a certain shortage of coal. The "Vega" carried on her first voyage a quantity of mail from prisoners of war and civil internees in Germany to their friends and relatives in the islands, and the ship took back on her return journey a quantity of mail for the prisoners of war and civil internees from their friends in the islands, but it has not yet been possible to make arrangements for delivery of messages from the United Kingdom. Nevertheless I hope that it may ultimately be possible to transmit messages, although, as the noble Lord will appreciate, this is not a matter for His Majesty's Government only. There is unfortunately another Government concerned as well.

In reply to the right reverend Prelate I may say that the cost of the first journey of the "Vega" with supplies to the island was borne by the British Red Cross. The cost of the second and subsequent journeys that the ship will make will be borne partly by His Majesty's Government and partly by the British Red Cross. Finally, in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Rennell, I would ask that the point he raised should not be pressed this afternoon. The noble Lord can, however, rest assured that we are considering plans for dealing with the rehabilitation of the islands and of their people. There is little more that I can add to what I have said to-day and what has been said in the past, but I wish to repudiate most strongly many of the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Portsea, which would have been very much better left unsaid.

4.29 p.m.

LORD PORTSEA

My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for his answer but I would say that while it is easy to repudiate it is not easy to prove that repudiation is either just or fair. I would ask the noble Earl to look up Hansard for the autumn of 1932 when in another place I brought forward the position of this country, its lack of armaments and all that that lack of armaments meant for the future. The islands' defence, as I have said, was left, and left by agreement, to the islanders themselves and paid for by them. And they could, and would, have defended their islands, if their arms and munitions had not been taken from them. The place was looked upon as a kind of "buffet." I can remember how at the time of the South African war there was a regiment in Jersey—altogether, I believe, there were about 600 Regulars and 3,000 Militia on the island—and the War Office sent over an inquiry as to how many cartridges they had because cartridges were badly needed. And how many cartridges do you think they had? Altogether there were just 671, and these were duly sent to the War Office in London. That was the kind of consideration and care which the War Office and the Government in those days showed for the islands and they have shown rather less on this occasion. It is not necessary to remind me that these islands are now in the possession of another Power. It is the whole gravamen of my charge against the Government that they let that other Power go there, that they cleared out—

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

My Lords, I really must interrupt my noble friend. Does he really mean to suggest that His 'Majesty's Government quite deliberately let the islands fall as a gift into the hands of the enemy?

LORD PORTSEA

I know it.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

You do not.

LORD PORTSEA

Thank you. The Government left the islands to their fate; they took down the flag and took away the arms twenty-four hours before the Germans arrived. If you do not call that leaving them, what do you call it? I suggest that the Government abandoned the islands. Surely the noble Earl knows that. If he does not, he has only to look the matter up.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

I disagree with everything you say on this, but it is not worth while my going on.

LORD PORTSEA

The noble Earl has been serving his country. He has been very well employed for he has been abroad fighting, and, of course, he has not had time to do more than one thing at a time. But I can assure him that what I say is correct. The Government took away arms, munitions and the flag twenty-four hours before the Germans arrived. If that is not leaving the islands, deserting them, and, to use a word which I used before and which Lord Selborne did not like, betraying them, what is it? If that is not betrayal then the word has lost its meaning. I may say that I have looked up the word in the Oxford Dictionary very carefully in order to make sure what it means. Well, it was a thing that England had never done before in her history, and one which I trust she will never do again. My Lords, I beg to ask leave to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.